Employment relations literature often distinguishes between social democratic/corporatist models of employment relations and liberal models of employment relations as they are seen as opposite or at least different ways of organizing labor markets. They are often characterized as having very different risk profiles in terms of relationships between employees, employers, and the state. Low levels of labor market regulation very often characterize the liberal models of employment relations as we know them from, for instance, the USA and the UK. This means that employment conditions are very often insecure and that the burden of unemployment risk mostly lies with the employees rather than the employer. Corporatist – or social democratic – employment relations models are, in contrast to the liberal models, often characterized by stricter regulation of the labor market and by high standards of employee protection together with high standards of welfare support. As a result, employment conditions and employment security are often seen as quite secure and high level in these social democratic models of employment relations. The burden of unemployment risk is shared between the employer (e.g. in relation to difficulties in dismissing employees), the state/government, and the employees. The concept of flexicurity has, however, challenged the traditional distinction between liberal and social democratic/corporatist labor market models. The Danish flexicurity model combines characteristics of the liberal and social democratic labor market models combining high levels of social security with high levels of flexibility.